Is Your Dog ‘Contraband’?

Is Your Dog ‘Contraband’?
American Thinker ^ | 8 Aug, 2017 | Mark J. Fitzgibbons

Posted on 8/8/2017, 11:05:28 AM by MtnClimber

An awful ruling for pet owners has come from a federal court, in a ruling by U.S. District Court Judge George Caram Steeh. But the threat is not just to Fido and Fluffy, because, as anyone familiar with how precedent becomes corrupted knows, the ruling will be cited and abused far beyond its original, flawed bases.

C.J. Ciaramella writes about this ruling at Reason Magazine, in “Federal Judge Rules Unlicensed Dogs Aren’t Protected By Fourth Amendment.” In deciding an unlicensed dog is “contraband” not protected by the Fourth Amendment, the ruling confuses government “licenses” with “title,” i.e., private ownership and possession. The ruling will eventually be cited in cases involving property other than dogs and other unlicensed activity in our overly license-happy statist society.

The crocodile tears shed by the judge for dog owners, however, will be particularly disdained. Quoting the judge’s written opinion Ciaramella writes:

(Excerpt)

Source: Is Your Dog ‘Contraband’?


About Gunny G

GnySgt USMC (Ret.) 1952--'72 PC: History, Poly-Tiks, Military, Stories, Controversial, Unusual, Humorous, etc.... "Simplify...y'know!"
This entry was posted in alternate news. Bookmark the permalink.